HapticV1, PascalFrancis, Corpus, bibRecord, 000466

Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms

Identifieur interne : 000466 ( PascalFrancis/Corpus ); précédent : 000465; suivant : 000467

Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms

Auteurs : Phillip Mucksavage ; David C. Kerbl ; Donald L. Pick ; Jason Y. Lee ; Elspeth M. Mcdougall ; Michael K. Louie

Source :

Journal of endourology [ 0892-7790 ] ; 2011.

RBID : Pascal:11-0353198

Descripteurs français

Pascal (Inist)
- Force, Robotique, Télémédecine, Instrumentation, Chirurgie, Néphrologie, Urologie, Traitement.

English descriptors

KwdEn :
- Force, Instruments, Nephrology, Robotics, Surgery, Telemedicine, Treatment, Urology.

Abstract

Introduction: The da Vinci® surgical platform is becoming increasingly available and utilized. Due to the lack of haptic feedback, visual cues are necessary to estimate grip forces and tissue tensions during surgery. We directly measured the grip forces of robotic EndoWrist® instruments using the three available da Vinci robotic surgical platforms. Methods: Robotic instruments were tested in the da Vinci S, Si, and Standard systems. A load cell was placed in a housing unit that allowed for measurement of the grip forces applied by the tip of each robotic instrument. Each instrument was tested six times, and all data were analyzed using Student's t-tests or analysis of variance when appropriate. Results: Slight differences in grip force were seen when the instrument was tested through 2 degrees of freedom at the tip (p = 0.02, analysis of variance) and when comparing a new instrument to an older instrument (p = 0.001 at the neutral position). There was no statistical difference in grip force between the left and right robotic arms. There was a broad range of grip forces between the various robotic instruments. The lowest grip force was registered in the double fenestrated grasper (2.26 ± 0.15 N), whereas the highest was seen in the Hem-o-lok® clip applier (39.92 ± 0.89 N). In comparison to the S and Si, the Standard platform appeared to have significantly higher grip forces. Conclusion: Different grip forces were observed among the various robotic instruments commonly used during urologic surgery and between the Standard and the S and Si platforms.

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Pour connaître la documentation sur le format Inist Standard.

A01	`01`	`1`		`@0 0892-7790`
A03		`1`		`@0 J. endourol.`
A05				`@2 25`
A06				`@2 3`
A08	`01`	`1`	`ENG`	`@1 Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms`
A11	`01`	`1`		`@1 MUCKSAVAGE (Phillip)`
A11	`02`	`1`		`@1 KERBL (David C.)`
A11	`03`	`1`		`@1 PICK (Donald L.)`
A11	`04`	`1`		`@1 LEE (Jason Y.)`
A11	`05`	`1`		`@1 MCDOUGALL (Elspeth M.)`
A11	`06`	`1`		`@1 LOUIE (Michael K.)`
A14	`01`			`@1 Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine @2 Orange, California @3 USA @Z 1 aut. @Z 2 aut. @Z 3 aut. @Z 4 aut. @Z 5 aut. @Z 6 aut.`
A20				`@1 523-528`
A21				`@1 2011`
A23	`01`			`@0 ENG`
A43	`01`			`@1 INIST @2 21584 @5 354000508546200280`
A44				`@0 0000 @1 © 2011 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.`
A45				`@0 7 ref.`
A47	`01`	`1`		`@0 11-0353198`
A60				`@1 P`
A61				`@0 A`
A64	`01`	`1`		`@0 Journal of endourology`
A66	`01`			`@0 USA`
C01	`01`		`ENG`	@0 Introduction: The da Vinci® surgical platform is becoming increasingly available and utilized. Due to the lack of haptic feedback, visual cues are necessary to estimate grip forces and tissue tensions during surgery. We directly measured the grip forces of robotic EndoWrist® instruments using the three available da Vinci robotic surgical platforms. Methods: Robotic instruments were tested in the da Vinci S, Si, and Standard systems. A load cell was placed in a housing unit that allowed for measurement of the grip forces applied by the tip of each robotic instrument. Each instrument was tested six times, and all data were analyzed using Student's t-tests or analysis of variance when appropriate. Results: Slight differences in grip force were seen when the instrument was tested through 2 degrees of freedom at the tip (p = 0.02, analysis of variance) and when comparing a new instrument to an older instrument (p = 0.001 at the neutral position). There was no statistical difference in grip force between the left and right robotic arms. There was a broad range of grip forces between the various robotic instruments. The lowest grip force was registered in the double fenestrated grasper (2.26 ± 0.15 N), whereas the highest was seen in the Hem-o-lok® clip applier (39.92 ± 0.89 N). In comparison to the S and Si, the Standard platform appeared to have significantly higher grip forces. Conclusion: Different grip forces were observed among the various robotic instruments commonly used during urologic surgery and between the Standard and the S and Si platforms.
C02	`01`	`X`		`@0 002B14`
C03	`01`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Force @5 02`
C03	`01`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Force @5 02`
C03	`01`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Fuerza @5 02`
C03	`02`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Robotique @5 03`
C03	`02`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Robotics @5 03`
C03	`02`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Robótica @5 03`
C03	`03`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Télémédecine @5 05`
C03	`03`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Telemedicine @5 05`
C03	`03`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Telemedicina @5 05`
C03	`04`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Instrumentation @5 06`
C03	`04`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Instruments @5 06`
C03	`04`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Instrumentación @5 06`
C03	`05`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Chirurgie @5 08`
C03	`05`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Surgery @5 08`
C03	`05`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Cirugía @5 08`
C03	`06`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Néphrologie @5 09`
C03	`06`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Nephrology @5 09`
C03	`06`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Nefrología @5 09`
C03	`07`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Urologie @5 11`
C03	`07`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Urology @5 11`
C03	`07`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Urología @5 11`
C03	`08`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Traitement @5 25`
C03	`08`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Treatment @5 25`
C03	`08`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Tratamiento @5 25`
N21				`@1 241`
N44	`01`			`@1 OTO`
N82				`@1 OTO`

Format Inist (serveur)

NO :	PASCAL 11-0353198 INIST
ET :	Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms
AU :	MUCKSAVAGE (Phillip); KERBL (David C.); PICK (Donald L.); LEE (Jason Y.); MCDOUGALL (Elspeth M.); LOUIE (Michael K.)
AF :	Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine/Orange, California/Etats-Unis (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut., 5 aut., 6 aut.)
DT :	Publication en série; Niveau analytique
SO :	Journal of endourology; ISSN 0892-7790; Etats-Unis; Da. 2011; Vol. 25; No. 3; Pp. 523-528; Bibl. 7 ref.
LA :	Anglais
EA :	Introduction: The da Vinci® surgical platform is becoming increasingly available and utilized. Due to the lack of haptic feedback, visual cues are necessary to estimate grip forces and tissue tensions during surgery. We directly measured the grip forces of robotic EndoWrist® instruments using the three available da Vinci robotic surgical platforms. Methods: Robotic instruments were tested in the da Vinci S, Si, and Standard systems. A load cell was placed in a housing unit that allowed for measurement of the grip forces applied by the tip of each robotic instrument. Each instrument was tested six times, and all data were analyzed using Student's t-tests or analysis of variance when appropriate. Results: Slight differences in grip force were seen when the instrument was tested through 2 degrees of freedom at the tip (p = 0.02, analysis of variance) and when comparing a new instrument to an older instrument (p = 0.001 at the neutral position). There was no statistical difference in grip force between the left and right robotic arms. There was a broad range of grip forces between the various robotic instruments. The lowest grip force was registered in the double fenestrated grasper (2.26 ± 0.15 N), whereas the highest was seen in the Hem-o-lok® clip applier (39.92 ± 0.89 N). In comparison to the S and Si, the Standard platform appeared to have significantly higher grip forces. Conclusion: Different grip forces were observed among the various robotic instruments commonly used during urologic surgery and between the Standard and the S and Si platforms.
CC :	002B14
FD :	Force; Robotique; Télémédecine; Instrumentation; Chirurgie; Néphrologie; Urologie; Traitement
ED :	Force; Robotics; Telemedicine; Instruments; Surgery; Nephrology; Urology; Treatment
SD :	Fuerza; Robótica; Telemedicina; Instrumentación; Cirugía; Nefrología; Urología; Tratamiento
LO :	INIST-21584.354000508546200280
ID :	11-0353198

Links to Exploration step

Pascal:11-0353198

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms</title>
<author><name sortKey="Mucksavage, Phillip" sort="Mucksavage, Phillip" uniqKey="Mucksavage P" first="Phillip" last="Mucksavage">Phillip Mucksavage</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Kerbl, David C" sort="Kerbl, David C" uniqKey="Kerbl D" first="David C." last="Kerbl">David C. Kerbl</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Pick, Donald L" sort="Pick, Donald L" uniqKey="Pick D" first="Donald L." last="Pick">Donald L. Pick</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Lee, Jason Y" sort="Lee, Jason Y" uniqKey="Lee J" first="Jason Y." last="Lee">Jason Y. Lee</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Mcdougall, Elspeth M" sort="Mcdougall, Elspeth M" uniqKey="Mcdougall E" first="Elspeth M." last="Mcdougall">Elspeth M. Mcdougall</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Louie, Michael K" sort="Louie, Michael K" uniqKey="Louie M" first="Michael K." last="Louie">Michael K. Louie</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno>
<idno type="inist">11-0353198</idno>
<date when="2011">2011</date>
<idno type="stanalyst">PASCAL 11-0353198 INIST</idno>
<idno type="RBID">Pascal:11-0353198</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Corpus">000466</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms</title>
<author><name sortKey="Mucksavage, Phillip" sort="Mucksavage, Phillip" uniqKey="Mucksavage P" first="Phillip" last="Mucksavage">Phillip Mucksavage</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Kerbl, David C" sort="Kerbl, David C" uniqKey="Kerbl D" first="David C." last="Kerbl">David C. Kerbl</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Pick, Donald L" sort="Pick, Donald L" uniqKey="Pick D" first="Donald L." last="Pick">Donald L. Pick</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Lee, Jason Y" sort="Lee, Jason Y" uniqKey="Lee J" first="Jason Y." last="Lee">Jason Y. Lee</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Mcdougall, Elspeth M" sort="Mcdougall, Elspeth M" uniqKey="Mcdougall E" first="Elspeth M." last="Mcdougall">Elspeth M. Mcdougall</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Louie, Michael K" sort="Louie, Michael K" uniqKey="Louie M" first="Michael K." last="Louie">Michael K. Louie</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of endourology</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. endourol.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0892-7790</idno>
<imprint><date when="2011">2011</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><title level="j" type="main">Journal of endourology</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. endourol.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0892-7790</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Force</term>
<term>Instruments</term>
<term>Nephrology</term>
<term>Robotics</term>
<term>Surgery</term>
<term>Telemedicine</term>
<term>Treatment</term>
<term>Urology</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr"><term>Force</term>
<term>Robotique</term>
<term>Télémédecine</term>
<term>Instrumentation</term>
<term>Chirurgie</term>
<term>Néphrologie</term>
<term>Urologie</term>
<term>Traitement</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Introduction: The da Vinci® surgical platform is becoming increasingly available and utilized. Due to the lack of haptic feedback, visual cues are necessary to estimate grip forces and tissue tensions during surgery. We directly measured the grip forces of robotic EndoWrist® instruments using the three available da Vinci robotic surgical platforms. Methods: Robotic instruments were tested in the da Vinci S, Si, and Standard systems. A load cell was placed in a housing unit that allowed for measurement of the grip forces applied by the tip of each robotic instrument. Each instrument was tested six times, and all data were analyzed using Student's t-tests or analysis of variance when appropriate. Results: Slight differences in grip force were seen when the instrument was tested through 2 degrees of freedom at the tip (p = 0.02, analysis of variance) and when comparing a new instrument to an older instrument (p = 0.001 at the neutral position). There was no statistical difference in grip force between the left and right robotic arms. There was a broad range of grip forces between the various robotic instruments. The lowest grip force was registered in the double fenestrated grasper (2.26 ± 0.15 N), whereas the highest was seen in the Hem-o-lok® clip applier (39.92 ± 0.89 N). In comparison to the S and Si, the Standard platform appeared to have significantly higher grip forces. Conclusion: Different grip forces were observed among the various robotic instruments commonly used during urologic surgery and between the Standard and the S and Si platforms.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<inist><standard h6="B"><pA><fA01 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>0892-7790</s0>
</fA01>
<fA03 i2="1"><s0>J. endourol.</s0>
</fA03>
<fA05><s2>25</s2>
</fA05>
<fA06><s2>3</s2>
</fA06>
<fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG"><s1>Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms</s1>
</fA08>
<fA11 i1="01" i2="1"><s1>MUCKSAVAGE (Phillip)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="02" i2="1"><s1>KERBL (David C.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="03" i2="1"><s1>PICK (Donald L.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="04" i2="1"><s1>LEE (Jason Y.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="05" i2="1"><s1>MCDOUGALL (Elspeth M.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="06" i2="1"><s1>LOUIE (Michael K.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine</s1>
<s2>Orange, California</s2>
<s3>USA</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA20><s1>523-528</s1>
</fA20>
<fA21><s1>2011</s1>
</fA21>
<fA23 i1="01"><s0>ENG</s0>
</fA23>
<fA43 i1="01"><s1>INIST</s1>
<s2>21584</s2>
<s5>354000508546200280</s5>
</fA43>
<fA44><s0>0000</s0>
<s1>© 2011 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.</s1>
</fA44>
<fA45><s0>7 ref.</s0>
</fA45>
<fA47 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>11-0353198</s0>
</fA47>
<fA60><s1>P</s1>
</fA60>
<fA61><s0>A</s0>
</fA61>
<fA64 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>Journal of endourology</s0>
</fA64>
<fA66 i1="01"><s0>USA</s0>
</fA66>
<fC01 i1="01" l="ENG"><s0>Introduction: The da Vinci® surgical platform is becoming increasingly available and utilized. Due to the lack of haptic feedback, visual cues are necessary to estimate grip forces and tissue tensions during surgery. We directly measured the grip forces of robotic EndoWrist® instruments using the three available da Vinci robotic surgical platforms. Methods: Robotic instruments were tested in the da Vinci S, Si, and Standard systems. A load cell was placed in a housing unit that allowed for measurement of the grip forces applied by the tip of each robotic instrument. Each instrument was tested six times, and all data were analyzed using Student's t-tests or analysis of variance when appropriate. Results: Slight differences in grip force were seen when the instrument was tested through 2 degrees of freedom at the tip (p = 0.02, analysis of variance) and when comparing a new instrument to an older instrument (p = 0.001 at the neutral position). There was no statistical difference in grip force between the left and right robotic arms. There was a broad range of grip forces between the various robotic instruments. The lowest grip force was registered in the double fenestrated grasper (2.26 ± 0.15 N), whereas the highest was seen in the Hem-o-lok® clip applier (39.92 ± 0.89 N). In comparison to the S and Si, the Standard platform appeared to have significantly higher grip forces. Conclusion: Different grip forces were observed among the various robotic instruments commonly used during urologic surgery and between the Standard and the S and Si platforms.</s0>
</fC01>
<fC02 i1="01" i2="X"><s0>002B14</s0>
</fC02>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Force</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Force</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Fuerza</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Robotique</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Robotics</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Robótica</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Télémédecine</s0>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Telemedicine</s0>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Telemedicina</s0>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Instrumentation</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Instruments</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Instrumentación</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Chirurgie</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Surgery</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Cirugía</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Néphrologie</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Nephrology</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Nefrología</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Urologie</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Urology</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Urología</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Traitement</s0>
<s5>25</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Treatment</s0>
<s5>25</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Tratamiento</s0>
<s5>25</s5>
</fC03>
<fN21><s1>241</s1>
</fN21>
<fN44 i1="01"><s1>OTO</s1>
</fN44>
<fN82><s1>OTO</s1>
</fN82>
</pA>
</standard>
<server><NO>PASCAL 11-0353198 INIST</NO>
<ET>Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms</ET>
<AU>MUCKSAVAGE (Phillip); KERBL (David C.); PICK (Donald L.); LEE (Jason Y.); MCDOUGALL (Elspeth M.); LOUIE (Michael K.)</AU>
<AF>Department of Urology, University of California-Irvine/Orange, California/Etats-Unis (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut., 4 aut., 5 aut., 6 aut.)</AF>
<DT>Publication en série; Niveau analytique</DT>
<SO>Journal of endourology; ISSN 0892-7790; Etats-Unis; Da. 2011; Vol. 25; No. 3; Pp. 523-528; Bibl. 7 ref.</SO>
<LA>Anglais</LA>
<EA>Introduction: The da Vinci® surgical platform is becoming increasingly available and utilized. Due to the lack of haptic feedback, visual cues are necessary to estimate grip forces and tissue tensions during surgery. We directly measured the grip forces of robotic EndoWrist® instruments using the three available da Vinci robotic surgical platforms. Methods: Robotic instruments were tested in the da Vinci S, Si, and Standard systems. A load cell was placed in a housing unit that allowed for measurement of the grip forces applied by the tip of each robotic instrument. Each instrument was tested six times, and all data were analyzed using Student's t-tests or analysis of variance when appropriate. Results: Slight differences in grip force were seen when the instrument was tested through 2 degrees of freedom at the tip (p = 0.02, analysis of variance) and when comparing a new instrument to an older instrument (p = 0.001 at the neutral position). There was no statistical difference in grip force between the left and right robotic arms. There was a broad range of grip forces between the various robotic instruments. The lowest grip force was registered in the double fenestrated grasper (2.26 ± 0.15 N), whereas the highest was seen in the Hem-o-lok® clip applier (39.92 ± 0.89 N). In comparison to the S and Si, the Standard platform appeared to have significantly higher grip forces. Conclusion: Different grip forces were observed among the various robotic instruments commonly used during urologic surgery and between the Standard and the S and Si platforms.</EA>
<CC>002B14</CC>
<FD>Force; Robotique; Télémédecine; Instrumentation; Chirurgie; Néphrologie; Urologie; Traitement</FD>
<ED>Force; Robotics; Telemedicine; Instruments; Surgery; Nephrology; Urology; Treatment</ED>
<SD>Fuerza; Robótica; Telemedicina; Instrumentación; Cirugía; Nefrología; Urología; Tratamiento</SD>
<LO>INIST-21584.354000508546200280</LO>
<ID>11-0353198</ID>
</server>
</inist>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Ticri/CIDE/explor/HapticV1/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000466 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000466 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Ticri/CIDE
   |area=    HapticV1
   |flux=    PascalFrancis
   |étape=   Corpus
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     Pascal:11-0353198
   |texte=   Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms
}}

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.23.
Data generation: Mon Jun 13 01:09:46 2016. Site generation: Wed Mar 6 09:54:07 2024

	Serveur d'exploration sur les dispositifs haptiques
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Serveur d'exploration sur les dispositifs haptiques

Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms

Differences in Grip Forces Among Various Robotic Instruments and da Vinci Surgical Platforms

Source :

Descripteurs français

English descriptors

Abstract

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Format Inist (serveur)

Links to Exploration step

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri